Overclock.net › Forums › Graphics Cards › NVIDIA › [Review]Effect of CPU overclock on GPUs performance
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[Review]Effect of CPU overclock on GPUs performance - Page 2

post #11 of 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by Defoler;13268522 
Some games, like Metro 2033 or Crysis 2, which have quite a new game engine, the GPUs and FPS isn't very much affected by CPU speeds when it comes to Dual-GPU.

A game engine's age has no effect on it CPU vs. GPU dependency, it's merely how it's coded. StarCraft 2 is newer than Metro and very CPU heavy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Defoler;13268522 
For Tri-SLI or Quad-SLI, here is the biggest difference.
You can get up to 20 or 30 FPS difference, which will greatly affect any type of surround or large monitors.
When you increase monitor resolution (either with Surround or a bigger monitor) you increase GPU dependency and decrease CPU dependency. You can't conclude how CPU-bound a game will be at a higher resolution by looking at these results.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Defoler;13268522 
Even a 980x can easily starve a GPU. Let alone a 920 or 965 with mild overclock.
This made little sense in that context, you basically first said that reviewers have to push their CPU's as far as possible and then you said that even a mildly OC'd i7 920 is enough.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Defoler;13268522 
For those with 2x Dual-GPUs, the scaling effect of the CPU is massive.
Especially from the PCIE and from CPU.
I have no idea what you meant with this. Rephrase, please?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Defoler;13268522 
I know that I did no tests at 2560x1600, or surround, but as the tests were not about GPU scaling but effect of CPU overclock, I don't plan to do any any time soon.
2560x1600 would be just as relevant as CPU scaling will change at higher resolutions. Your rig is perfect for testing how much CPU power is needed for tri- or quad-SLI at 2560x1600.

Quote:
Originally Posted by OptimusCaik;13268787 
So overclocking the CPU if one has a single GPU is completely redundant?
That's not what he concluded. It depends on the speed of the CPU. A Phenom II X2 powering a GTX 580 will benefit HUGELY from overclocking.
Edited by B!0HaZard - 4/25/11 at 1:58pm
M1XN
(18 items)
 
Study Zenbook
(5 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 4770K @ 4.2 GHz ASUS Maximus VI Impact MSI GTX 970 Gaming 4G 2x8 GB Kingston HyperX DDR3 @ 2400 MHz 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
Crucial M4 64 GB Crucial M4 128 GB SAMSUNG Spinpoint M9T 2 TB LiteOn DL-8ATSH 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Noctua NH-C14 Windows 10 64-bit ViewSonic VP2770 Vortex Pok3r 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Corsair SF600 NCASE M1 V2.5 Logitech G502 SteelSeries QcK+ 
AudioOther
HiFiMan HE-400 Logitech C920 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
i5-3317 GT 620M 2 GB soldered + 8 GB Corsair OCZ Vertex 3 120 
OS
Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit 
  hide details  
Reply
M1XN
(18 items)
 
Study Zenbook
(5 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 4770K @ 4.2 GHz ASUS Maximus VI Impact MSI GTX 970 Gaming 4G 2x8 GB Kingston HyperX DDR3 @ 2400 MHz 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
Crucial M4 64 GB Crucial M4 128 GB SAMSUNG Spinpoint M9T 2 TB LiteOn DL-8ATSH 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Noctua NH-C14 Windows 10 64-bit ViewSonic VP2770 Vortex Pok3r 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Corsair SF600 NCASE M1 V2.5 Logitech G502 SteelSeries QcK+ 
AudioOther
HiFiMan HE-400 Logitech C920 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
i5-3317 GT 620M 2 GB soldered + 8 GB Corsair OCZ Vertex 3 120 
OS
Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit 
  hide details  
Reply
post #12 of 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by pursuinginsanity;13268668 
So.. why does metro perform best at 2.5ghz with no HT? (even with 4 gpus)

Your conclusion is tainted by this one anomalous result.

Not really ... I think it just shows Metro suffers a small perf hit with HT on.

Nice work Defoler. Funny thing is, aside from Crysis Warhead, these tests aren't really the more cpu-dependent apps out there. Differences would be even greater with tests of, say, BFBC2, Far Cry 2, and Supreme Commander ... all of which require a good amount of CPU work per frame rendered.

One thing that I think is worth noting here though is that none of the games appear to become 'unplayable' with the proc at 2.5GHz. Yes, the bottlenecking effect is there, it's definitely 'measurable' ... but it does not look like the kind of differences one would likely physically 'notice' while gaming w/o an FPS meter running.

Of course, an i7 at 2.5 is still a very powerful processor sitting on a very robust platform. If you were to throw on results with something like a q6600 at stock (2.4GHz) ... then you'd see some *serious* bottlenecking going on, esp. with tri and quad SLI.

And lastly ... not that we didn't already suspect this, but boy is quad-SLI ever overkill for gaming at 1920 resolution! The scaling vs 3 gpu's is practically non-existent at this res, outside of the toughest DX11 synthetics here (3dMark11 and Heaven). Not even Metro scales very well, and it's obviously not a very cpu-dependent title, based on our handy charts thumb.gif
Edited by brettjv - 4/25/11 at 2:02pm
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
xeon X5675 6-core @ 4.1ghz (1.29v, 20x205 +ht ) rampage iii extreme msi rx470 gaming X (the $159 budget king) 3 x 2gb corsair xms3 pc12800 (9-9-9-24-1T@1600MHz) 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
hynix 250gb ssd (boot), 2tb deskstar (apps),1tb... plextor px-712sa - still the best optical drive... corsair h8o v2 aio W10 home 
MonitorPowerCaseAudio
asus vw266h 25.5" (1920x1200) abs sl (enermax revolution) * single 70A rail 850w silverstone rv-03 XFi Titanium 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
xeon X5675 6-core @ 4.1ghz (1.29v, 20x205 +ht ) rampage iii extreme msi rx470 gaming X (the $159 budget king) 3 x 2gb corsair xms3 pc12800 (9-9-9-24-1T@1600MHz) 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
hynix 250gb ssd (boot), 2tb deskstar (apps),1tb... plextor px-712sa - still the best optical drive... corsair h8o v2 aio W10 home 
MonitorPowerCaseAudio
asus vw266h 25.5" (1920x1200) abs sl (enermax revolution) * single 70A rail 850w silverstone rv-03 XFi Titanium 
  hide details  
Reply
post #13 of 89
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by B!0HaZard;13268911 

This made little sense in that context, you basically first said that reviewers have to push their CPU's as far as possible and then you said that even a mildly OC'd i7 920 is enough.

You read it wrong.
It states that if the 980 can starve the GPUs, the 920 and 965 will do that even more.
Quote:
Originally Posted by B!0HaZard;13268911 
2560x1600 would be just as relevant as CPU scaling will change at higher resolutions. Your rig is perfect for testing how much CPU power is needed for tri- or quad-SLI at 2560x1600.

You are welcome to provide me with a 2560x1600 monitor and I will do a review with that too.
Surround is not equal to single monitor, and this review is not about GPU power, but how the CPU affect it, not GPU scaling or how strong GPUs are to handle high resolutions.
You missed the whole point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by brettjv;13268940 
Nice work Defoler. Funny thing is, aside from Crysis Warhead, these tests aren't really the more cpu-dependent apps out there. Differences would be even greater with tests of, say, BFBC2, Far Cry 2, and Supreme Commander ... all of which require a good amount of CPU work per frame rendered.

Maybe that is what you missed.

I don't want to see GPU scaling or Game scaling.
I want to see the CPU on GPU performance.
Not Game vs CPU or CPU vs GPU or resolution scaling.

I just wanted to answer one simple question, and I stated that several times:
Does CPU overclock affect the GPUs performance?

I added Crysis warhead as more of a check. And I needed a game with DX10 as well tongue.gif
And of course, I need a game I have. And FC2 or BFBC2 aren't that great for a test like that.
Main system
(16 items)
 
Editing PC
(8 items)
 
 
CPUGraphicsGraphicsRAM
E5-1680v2 AMD FirePro D700 AMD FirePro D700 64GB 1866mhz 
Hard DriveOSMonitorCase
1TB PCIE SSD OSX 10.10.x Dell U2713H Mac Pro 
  hide details  
Reply
Main system
(16 items)
 
Editing PC
(8 items)
 
 
CPUGraphicsGraphicsRAM
E5-1680v2 AMD FirePro D700 AMD FirePro D700 64GB 1866mhz 
Hard DriveOSMonitorCase
1TB PCIE SSD OSX 10.10.x Dell U2713H Mac Pro 
  hide details  
Reply
post #14 of 89
My only real problem with this review is the lack of minimum framerates. The averages might be close while the minimum framerates vary hugely. Imagine that the average at 2.5 GHz is 55 FPS and the average at 4 GHz is 60 FPS. These numbers seems very close, but minimum framerates might be 20 FPS for 2.5 GHz and 40 FPS for 4 GHz if they're only that low for a short time. A CPU bottleneck will often happen at certain points in the benchmark (e.g. if there's a lot of physics calculations after an explosion) and even if it's a HUGE bottleneck at times, we won't see much difference in average framerates.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Defoler;13269041 
You read it wrong.
It states that if the 980 can starve the GPUs, the 920 and 965 will do that even more.
Yeah, seems I did.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Defoler;13269041 
You are welcome to provide me with a 2560x1600 monitor and I will do a review with that too.
Surround is not equal to single monitor, and this review is not about GPU power, but how the CPU affect it, not GPU scaling or how strong GPUs are to handle high resolutions.
You missed the whole point.

Surround is exactly like a single monitor in that to the GPU, it's just a single monitor with a very high and very wide resolution. I assumed you had a 2560x1600 monitor since you mentioned it, but Surround would be just as good for testing.

I didn't say it was about GPU power. CPU dependency will vary at different resolutions, so at higher resolutions (e.g. while using Surround), you'll see less CPU bottleneck. Therefore you'll see that the CPU affects the FPS less at high resolutions.

I didn't miss the whole point, I actually think you don't know what's causing these results. I don't think you understand what variables there are and what affects performance and how it affects it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Defoler;13269110 
Maybe that is what you missed.

I don't want to see GPU scaling or Game scaling.
I want to see the CPU on GPU performance.
Not Game vs CPU or CPU vs GPU or resolution scaling.

I just wanted to answer one simple question, and I stated that several times:
Does CPU overclock affect the GPUs performance?

I added Crysis warhead as more of a check. And I needed a game with DX10 as well tongue.gif
And of course, I need a game I have. And FC2 or BFBC2 aren't that great for a test like that.
Um, the games he mentioned are MORE CPU dependent. They'd be affected MORE by CPU speed and they're therefore JUST AS relevant for this review as your GPU dependent games.

To answer your question: CPU overclock does affect the GPUs performance to some degree, especially in CPU dependent games like Far Cry 2 and BC2 and at low resolutions.
Edited by B!0HaZard - 4/25/11 at 2:17pm
M1XN
(18 items)
 
Study Zenbook
(5 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 4770K @ 4.2 GHz ASUS Maximus VI Impact MSI GTX 970 Gaming 4G 2x8 GB Kingston HyperX DDR3 @ 2400 MHz 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
Crucial M4 64 GB Crucial M4 128 GB SAMSUNG Spinpoint M9T 2 TB LiteOn DL-8ATSH 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Noctua NH-C14 Windows 10 64-bit ViewSonic VP2770 Vortex Pok3r 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Corsair SF600 NCASE M1 V2.5 Logitech G502 SteelSeries QcK+ 
AudioOther
HiFiMan HE-400 Logitech C920 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
i5-3317 GT 620M 2 GB soldered + 8 GB Corsair OCZ Vertex 3 120 
OS
Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit 
  hide details  
Reply
M1XN
(18 items)
 
Study Zenbook
(5 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 4770K @ 4.2 GHz ASUS Maximus VI Impact MSI GTX 970 Gaming 4G 2x8 GB Kingston HyperX DDR3 @ 2400 MHz 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
Crucial M4 64 GB Crucial M4 128 GB SAMSUNG Spinpoint M9T 2 TB LiteOn DL-8ATSH 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Noctua NH-C14 Windows 10 64-bit ViewSonic VP2770 Vortex Pok3r 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Corsair SF600 NCASE M1 V2.5 Logitech G502 SteelSeries QcK+ 
AudioOther
HiFiMan HE-400 Logitech C920 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
i5-3317 GT 620M 2 GB soldered + 8 GB Corsair OCZ Vertex 3 120 
OS
Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit 
  hide details  
Reply
post #15 of 89
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by B!0HaZard;13269124 
My only real problem with this review is the lack of minimum framerates. The averages might be close while the minimum framerates vary hugely. Imagine that the average at 2.5 GHz is 55 FPS and the average at 4 GHz is 60 FPS. These numbers seems very close, but minimum framerates might be 20 FPS for 2.5 GHz and 40 FPS for 4 GHz if they're only that low for a short time.
I can grantee you that minimal FPS is not affected by CPU.

I actually got 14.58 minimal FPS in metro 2033 at 2.5 with HT off, and 14.07 at 4.3 at metro 2033.
Or Dirt 2 for example has similar reduction of FPS across the board, usually 30 fps less than the average score.
So this is not the issue.

Quote:
Originally Posted by B!0HaZard;13269124 
Surround is exactly like a single monitor in that to the GPU, it's just a single monitor with a very high and very wide resolution. I assumed you had a 2560x1600 monitor since you mentioned it, but Surround would be just as good for testing.

I didn't say it was about GPU power. CPU dependency will vary at different resolutions, so at higher resolutions (e.g. while using Surround), you'll see less CPU bottleneck. Therefore you'll see that the CPU affects the FPS less at high resolutions.

I disagree with you completely on all what you wrote.
Surround is not single monitor, and its not what I was going for at all.

Quote:
Originally Posted by B!0HaZard;13269124 
Um, the games he mentioned are MORE CPU dependent. They'd be affected MORE by CPU speed and they're therefore JUST AS relevant for this review as your GPU dependent games.

To answer your question: CPU overclock does affect the GPUs performance to some degree, especially in CPU dependent games like Far Cry 2 and BC2 and at low resolutions.

Again, I disagree completely.
A high CPU usage game like FC2 for example, will show me false results.
If you increase the CPU, how do you know the GPU performs well, or the game engine performances well?
This will make the whole review useless.


Don't make this review to something you want, and now something it is.
Seems that you did not understand the review at all.
Main system
(16 items)
 
Editing PC
(8 items)
 
 
CPUGraphicsGraphicsRAM
E5-1680v2 AMD FirePro D700 AMD FirePro D700 64GB 1866mhz 
Hard DriveOSMonitorCase
1TB PCIE SSD OSX 10.10.x Dell U2713H Mac Pro 
  hide details  
Reply
Main system
(16 items)
 
Editing PC
(8 items)
 
 
CPUGraphicsGraphicsRAM
E5-1680v2 AMD FirePro D700 AMD FirePro D700 64GB 1866mhz 
Hard DriveOSMonitorCase
1TB PCIE SSD OSX 10.10.x Dell U2713H Mac Pro 
  hide details  
Reply
post #16 of 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by Defoler;13269110 
Maybe that is what you missed.

I don't want to see GPU scaling or Game scaling.
I want to see the CPU on GPU performance.
Not Game vs CPU or CPU vs GPU or resolution scaling.

I just wanted to answer one simple question, and I stated that several times:
Does CPU overclock affect the GPUs performance?

I added Crysis warhead as more of a check. And I needed a game with DX10 as well tongue.gif
And of course, I need a game I have. And FC2 or BFBC2 aren't that great for a test like that.

I didn't 'miss' anything DF. I fully understand 'the point' of the article/experiment thumb.gif

All I'm telling you is that had you chosen to include results from some of the more CPU-dependent titles in this review, such as BFBC2 or Far Cry 2, you would have discovered that the CPU bottlenecking effect can be even more extreme than what is illustrated by the particular suite of games/benches that you did choose to test ... the large majority of which do NOT have a particularly high CPU demand per frame rendered ... aside from Warhead.

I'm not being critical, and I understand needing to work with what you have available. I'm just saying ... by and large these are actually more the 'best-case' scenarios as opposed to 'worst-case' scenarios in terms of the extent of the bottlenecking effect.
Edited by brettjv - 4/25/11 at 2:24pm
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
xeon X5675 6-core @ 4.1ghz (1.29v, 20x205 +ht ) rampage iii extreme msi rx470 gaming X (the $159 budget king) 3 x 2gb corsair xms3 pc12800 (9-9-9-24-1T@1600MHz) 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
hynix 250gb ssd (boot), 2tb deskstar (apps),1tb... plextor px-712sa - still the best optical drive... corsair h8o v2 aio W10 home 
MonitorPowerCaseAudio
asus vw266h 25.5" (1920x1200) abs sl (enermax revolution) * single 70A rail 850w silverstone rv-03 XFi Titanium 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
xeon X5675 6-core @ 4.1ghz (1.29v, 20x205 +ht ) rampage iii extreme msi rx470 gaming X (the $159 budget king) 3 x 2gb corsair xms3 pc12800 (9-9-9-24-1T@1600MHz) 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
hynix 250gb ssd (boot), 2tb deskstar (apps),1tb... plextor px-712sa - still the best optical drive... corsair h8o v2 aio W10 home 
MonitorPowerCaseAudio
asus vw266h 25.5" (1920x1200) abs sl (enermax revolution) * single 70A rail 850w silverstone rv-03 XFi Titanium 
  hide details  
Reply
post #17 of 89
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by brettjv;13269262 
I didn't 'miss' anything DF. I fully understand 'the point' of the article/experiment thumb.gif

All I'm telling you is that had you chosen to include results from some of the more CPU-dependent titles in this review, such as BFBC2 or Far Cry 2, you would have discovered that the CPU bottlenecking effect can be even more extreme than what is illustrated by the particular suite of games/benches that you did choose to test ... the large majority of which do NOT have a particularly high CPU demand per frame rendered ... aside from Warhead.

Understood smile.gif

But that is what I was going for.
I wanted to make sure that what I can test, a game engine will not affect as much on the performance (except warhead).

I didn't want to ponder whether the increase in FPS was because the game runs better, or the GPUs has more room to breath.

This is why the single card is mainly included. Games which scale very little in single card or 2-way SLI, will show the real effect of CPU on the GPU/Drivers.
Also the reason why the FPS results are pretty high.
Because I didn't want to make the GPUs the bottle-neck.

Its like taking 4 kids to the playground, and see how they react and play when put in a 1 square foot playground, 10 square foot or 100 square foot.
And not if you strap on these kids and 40kg rock, and see how they play in a 100 square foot playground.
Quote:
Originally Posted by B!0HaZard;13269282 
Are you retarded?

No, but I think you have unresolved parental issues smile.gif

If a person disagree with you, and that makes him "retarted", you are what you call others.

If you have a problem, you are welcome to keep it to yourself. Keep the thread clean.
Thanks.
Main system
(16 items)
 
Editing PC
(8 items)
 
 
CPUGraphicsGraphicsRAM
E5-1680v2 AMD FirePro D700 AMD FirePro D700 64GB 1866mhz 
Hard DriveOSMonitorCase
1TB PCIE SSD OSX 10.10.x Dell U2713H Mac Pro 
  hide details  
Reply
Main system
(16 items)
 
Editing PC
(8 items)
 
 
CPUGraphicsGraphicsRAM
E5-1680v2 AMD FirePro D700 AMD FirePro D700 64GB 1866mhz 
Hard DriveOSMonitorCase
1TB PCIE SSD OSX 10.10.x Dell U2713H Mac Pro 
  hide details  
Reply
post #18 of 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by Defoler;13269355 
No, but I think you have unresolved parental issues smile.gif

If a person disagree with you, and that makes him "retarted", you are what you call others.

If you have a problem, you are welcome to keep it to yourself. Keep the thread clean.
Thanks.

You just said that minimal FPS isn't affected by CPU. But aren't you CPU bottlenecked in most of the tri- and quad-SLI tests? So you're saying that because you're CPU bottlenecked, only your GPUs determine performance? The CPU isn't limiting the GPUs and isn't causing low minimum framerates?

The Metro 2033 benchmark is known to not give reliable minimum framerates. It's a faulty benchmark.

So first you said that the CPU doesn't affect minimum framerates and then you say it does in Dirt 2? If the FPS is constantly 30 FPS below average then it's logically not the same at different clock speeds. With an avg FPS of 60, you'd get 30 minimum and with an avg of 100, you'd get 70 minimum. You just said that it DOES in fact depend on the CPU.

You just said that Surround pixels =/= single monitor pixels. Whether or not you're using multiple displays isn't relevant to the test. All the GPUs are seeing, is a single monitor, albeit at 5760x1080. The GPUs don't know that the pixels are divided between 3 displays. A pixel is a pixel. Surround at 5760x1080 puts a higher load on the GPUs than a single monitor at 2560x1600, therefore being less dependent on CPU, therefore being relevant for the test because the CPU will need to be OC'd less to achieve max possible FPS with the GPUs in question.

You just said that using FC2 (a game) would give you a false result not related to what you're doing (testing performance in games) because it uses a different engine than the other games (which all have different engines). Besides that, you said that including more results would ruin everything (which it would not as the rest of the results are still there).


I apologize for my earlier post, but I've tried to reason with you and you obviously don't know how game performance works, how CPU and GPU work together or how to read your own results.
M1XN
(18 items)
 
Study Zenbook
(5 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 4770K @ 4.2 GHz ASUS Maximus VI Impact MSI GTX 970 Gaming 4G 2x8 GB Kingston HyperX DDR3 @ 2400 MHz 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
Crucial M4 64 GB Crucial M4 128 GB SAMSUNG Spinpoint M9T 2 TB LiteOn DL-8ATSH 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Noctua NH-C14 Windows 10 64-bit ViewSonic VP2770 Vortex Pok3r 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Corsair SF600 NCASE M1 V2.5 Logitech G502 SteelSeries QcK+ 
AudioOther
HiFiMan HE-400 Logitech C920 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
i5-3317 GT 620M 2 GB soldered + 8 GB Corsair OCZ Vertex 3 120 
OS
Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit 
  hide details  
Reply
M1XN
(18 items)
 
Study Zenbook
(5 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 4770K @ 4.2 GHz ASUS Maximus VI Impact MSI GTX 970 Gaming 4G 2x8 GB Kingston HyperX DDR3 @ 2400 MHz 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
Crucial M4 64 GB Crucial M4 128 GB SAMSUNG Spinpoint M9T 2 TB LiteOn DL-8ATSH 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Noctua NH-C14 Windows 10 64-bit ViewSonic VP2770 Vortex Pok3r 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Corsair SF600 NCASE M1 V2.5 Logitech G502 SteelSeries QcK+ 
AudioOther
HiFiMan HE-400 Logitech C920 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
i5-3317 GT 620M 2 GB soldered + 8 GB Corsair OCZ Vertex 3 120 
OS
Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit 
  hide details  
Reply
post #19 of 89
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by B!0HaZard;13269665 
You just said that minimal FPS isn't affected by CPU. But aren't you CPU bottlenecked in most of the tri- and quad-SLI tests? So you're saying that because you're CPU bottlenecked, only your GPUs determine performance? The CPU isn't limiting the GPUs and isn't causing low minimum framerates?
That is a completely jumbled up question.
Make it more understandable if you want an answer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by B!0HaZard;13269665 
The Metro 2033 benchmark is known to not give reliable minimum framerates. It's a faulty benchmark.
You are welcome to prove that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by B!0HaZard;13269665 
So first you said that the CPU doesn't affect minimum framerates and then you say it does in Dirt 2? If the FPS is constantly 30 FPS below average then it's logically not the same at different clock speeds. With an avg FPS of 60, you'd get 30 minimum and with an avg of 100, you'd get 70 minimum. You just said that it DOES in fact depend on the CPU.
Again, you do not understand.
If the average vs minimal FPS relation stays the same, the CPU bottle-neck does not affect lower FPS, but it affects the general FPS of the game.
You stated that the minimal is what proves or disprove, which is not true.

I like how you keep jumping to different ideas on the same think line without keeping it straight.
Quote:
Originally Posted by B!0HaZard;13269665 
You just said that Surround pixels =/= single monitor pixels. Whether or not you're using multiple displays isn't relevant to the test. All the GPUs are seeing, is a single monitor, albeit at 5760x1080. The GPUs don't know that the pixels are divided between 3 displays. A pixel is a pixel. Surround at 5760x1080 puts a higher load on the GPUs than a single monitor at 2560x1600, therefore being less dependent on CPU, therefore being relevant for the test because the CPU will need to be OC'd less to achieve max possible FPS with the GPUs in question.
I will say it again.
Surround is no single monitor.
Drivers work differently. Yes, cards see just one monitor when making the image, but the drivers don't, and it affects the results. If you don't understand that, you don't understand surround at all.
Also surround is is almost 50% more pixels than single 2560x1600. So how can you even compare?

The stress on the GPUs will make them the bottle-neck, instead of the CPU.
Its like putting a 50kg brick on a kid and see how he plays. Completely useless to this review.
The GPUs being dependent on the CPU is EXACTLY what this review is.
Not something you are trying to throw into it. Its completely missing the point
Quote:
Originally Posted by B!0HaZard;13269665 
You just said that using FC2 (a game) would give you a false result not related to what you're doing (testing performance in games) because it uses a different engine than the other games (which all have different engines). Besides that, you said that including more results would ruin everything (which it would not as the rest of the results are still there).
This is not what I said.
I don't know what you read, but clearly its from another dimension.

Quote:
Originally Posted by B!0HaZard;13269665 
I apologize for my earlier post, but I've tried to reason with you and you obviously don't know how game performance works, how CPU and GPU work together or how to read your own results.

Don't really accept your apology.
Calling out like that is bad taste. Its stupid and shows very little character about you.
And you clearly have more to learn than me about CPU and GPUs from all that you wrote. So I'm apologize if I'm not taking you as a teacher of such things.
Main system
(16 items)
 
Editing PC
(8 items)
 
 
CPUGraphicsGraphicsRAM
E5-1680v2 AMD FirePro D700 AMD FirePro D700 64GB 1866mhz 
Hard DriveOSMonitorCase
1TB PCIE SSD OSX 10.10.x Dell U2713H Mac Pro 
  hide details  
Reply
Main system
(16 items)
 
Editing PC
(8 items)
 
 
CPUGraphicsGraphicsRAM
E5-1680v2 AMD FirePro D700 AMD FirePro D700 64GB 1866mhz 
Hard DriveOSMonitorCase
1TB PCIE SSD OSX 10.10.x Dell U2713H Mac Pro 
  hide details  
Reply
post #20 of 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by Defoler;13269881 
That is a completely jumbled up question.
Make it more understandable if you want an answer.
I honestly don't care, they aren't important.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Defoler;13269881 
You are welcome to prove that.
I can possibly do that tomorrow. I'd recommend that you go here and look at the graphs. You'll notice that they have a lot of very sudden, very short dips. These are stutters that seem to give very low minimum framerate despite the fact that the "actual" minimum framerate (e.g. the lowest framerate caused by CPU/GPU bottlenecks) is pretty high.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Defoler;13269881 
Again, you do not understand.
If the average vs minimal FPS relation stays the same, the CPU bottle-neck does not affect lower FPS, but it affects the general FPS of the game.
You stated that the minimal is what proves or disprove, which is not true.
But there's no such thing as a "general FPS". The CPU bottleneck gives you low minimums as well as lower averages, but the minimums may vary far more than the averages as can be seen in my "Will your aging dual core bottleneck your graphics card?"-review.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Defoler;13269881 
I like how you keep jumping to different ideas on the same think line without keeping it straight.
There are many variables in these things. I'm actually addressing the issues one at a time, but your confusion doesn't surprise me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Defoler;13269881 
I will say it again.
Surround is no single monitor.
Drivers work differently. Yes, cards see just one monitor when making the image, but the drivers don't, and it affects the results. If you don't understand that, you don't understand surround at all.
Also surround is is almost 50% more pixels than single 2560x1600. So how can you even compare?

The stress on the GPUs will make them the bottle-neck, instead of the CPU.
Its like putting a 50kg brick on a kid and see how he plays. Completely useless to this review.
The GPUs being dependent on the CPU is EXACTLY what this review is.
Not something you are trying to throw into it. Its completely missing the point
I didn't say Surround is a single monitor.
Drivers should make little difference in performance, it's still just pixels. There can be problems in some programs though.
I said that 5760x1080 is a higher resolution than 2560x1600 and that it's therefore even better for what I'm trying to show you, yet you seem to have skipped that part.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Defoler;13269881 
This is not what I said.
I don't know what you read, but clearly its from another dimension.
You're welcome to prove that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Defoler;13269881 
Don't really accept your apology.
Calling out like that is bad taste. Its stupid and shows very little character about you.
Agreed, but I got mad.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Defoler;13269881 
And you clearly have more to learn than me about CPU and GPUs from all that you wrote. So I'm apologize if I'm not taking you as a teacher of such things.

Are you a troll?
Edited by B!0HaZard - 4/25/11 at 3:34pm
M1XN
(18 items)
 
Study Zenbook
(5 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 4770K @ 4.2 GHz ASUS Maximus VI Impact MSI GTX 970 Gaming 4G 2x8 GB Kingston HyperX DDR3 @ 2400 MHz 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
Crucial M4 64 GB Crucial M4 128 GB SAMSUNG Spinpoint M9T 2 TB LiteOn DL-8ATSH 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Noctua NH-C14 Windows 10 64-bit ViewSonic VP2770 Vortex Pok3r 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Corsair SF600 NCASE M1 V2.5 Logitech G502 SteelSeries QcK+ 
AudioOther
HiFiMan HE-400 Logitech C920 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
i5-3317 GT 620M 2 GB soldered + 8 GB Corsair OCZ Vertex 3 120 
OS
Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit 
  hide details  
Reply
M1XN
(18 items)
 
Study Zenbook
(5 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 4770K @ 4.2 GHz ASUS Maximus VI Impact MSI GTX 970 Gaming 4G 2x8 GB Kingston HyperX DDR3 @ 2400 MHz 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
Crucial M4 64 GB Crucial M4 128 GB SAMSUNG Spinpoint M9T 2 TB LiteOn DL-8ATSH 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Noctua NH-C14 Windows 10 64-bit ViewSonic VP2770 Vortex Pok3r 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Corsair SF600 NCASE M1 V2.5 Logitech G502 SteelSeries QcK+ 
AudioOther
HiFiMan HE-400 Logitech C920 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
i5-3317 GT 620M 2 GB soldered + 8 GB Corsair OCZ Vertex 3 120 
OS
Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit 
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: NVIDIA
Overclock.net › Forums › Graphics Cards › NVIDIA › [Review]Effect of CPU overclock on GPUs performance